is it me but, Has communism ever actualy been communism?

So looking over history all the leader of communist countries have been dictators but in reality that isn't communism in fact in communism even the
government is equal to the people, all I see around the world is dictators from military coup and people that have inherited or shifted votes, this is
more dictatorship than communism. It is kinda bad to think that so many people are Anti or Pro when in the real world it hasn't been implemented on
any country that has a democratic or socialist government, to me communism is more of a way a country is run than how the government is
organised(republican/liberal/conservative). What's your stance on this?

True communism has never been realised. What we see now is the authoritarian countries taking their shape from the early days of the soviet union.
This would be the structure that Lenin and more so, Stalin would have used. Communism works on the premise on the abolition of property and then the
eventual abolition of the state entirely, this has never been truly seen. What we have seen is state capitalism which have been named communist due to
both propaganda and state ownership of major industrial complexes.

If the mode of government is supposed to reflect the nature of the people it governs, it could be said that communism reflects poorly, because any
attempt to adopt it falls short. Then again, no one has really adopted it.

I have a suggestion - how about all the people who think that Communism is possible buy huge area of land in Canada or Russia (where it is cheap) and
attempt to live accordingly. My bet - dictatorship in 2 years.
Providing to everyone according to their needs means that needs have to be defined and common ownership over means of production means that those
means will be controlled and regulated. The only way to define ,control and regulate when there is common ownership over means of production is by
government ,bureaucracy and planned economy. Since the system allows the concept "from anyone according to his capabilities" some law enforcement will
be needed. Otherwise people who should work in the field growing crops but will consider them-self incapable to work hard for 10 hours a day while
having the same needs as bureaucrats sitting in air-conditioned offices from 900 to 1700,would rather not to work. And this is planned economy - if
somebody does not do stuff, someone will not get his needs filled.
There will be dissent of those who got harder jobs ,government will be forced to get more and more strict and voila - you got a dictatorship.

One problem with all governments is even if everyone is equal and it's all working fine. Here's the problem. Evil people start to group up with each
other to take from everyone else. Food/money/property. So to combat this, good people have to group up also to fight back.

So then the bad groups group into an even bigger group, and so now the good guys have to have a bigger group to combat that group and so on.

Over time you end up with a centralized government from all the groups grouping up. To fight things like organized crime you get things like the FBI.
See where this is going?

After time, the government becomes corrupt and turns evil too because their group gets too big. Now you have to revolt because big nasty oligarchs go
insane with power. They do what they do simply because they have the ability to do so. Where if you didn't have a big centralized behemoth it wouldn't
have the authority or power to be corrupt. But absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Then, after the revolt, the problem starts over. Now the governments gone and there's no one to keep law and order. So what happens? Bad guys start to
group up. Better elect a sheriff! Oh there's lots of bad people! Better deputize some deputies! Here we are grouping up again. Next thing you know,
you've went and got yourself a government again.

This cycle is what screws up everything. Obviously I'm simplifying, but that's really the heart of it all. What I'm saying is that even in an ideal
perfect communist country, it wouldn't stay true communism for long. If the system could be taken advantage of, evil people would find a way to group
up and take advantage of it. That's what they've always done in every system.

In an ideal world you wouldn't need a government at all. People would just do their own thing and mind their own business. And if they did work with
each other it'd be in a productive, friendly, or scientific manner.

But evil people like to work together. So good people HAVE to work together and continually combat them. That's just the way it is. That's why this
website is here really if you think about it.

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
I have a suggestion - how about all the people who think that Communism is possible buy huge area of land in Canada or Russia (where it is cheap) and
attempt to live accordingly. My bet - dictatorship in 2 years.
Providing to everyone according to their needs means that needs have

edit on 21-12-2011 by ZeroKnowledge because: (no reason given)

it wouldn't work because law needs to be made as a equal voting system for the people to vote what laws they want passed. just an area of land
wouldn't work, plus all farming can be produced by hydroponics and computers these days vary really people need to go into them places unless fro
scientific reading or to change equipment

One problem with all governments is even if everyone is equal and it's all working fine. Here's the problem. Evil people start to group up with each
other to take from everyone else. Food/money/property. So to combat this, good people have to group up also to fight back.

So then the bad groups group into an even bigger group, and so now the good guys have to have a bigger group to combat that group and so on.

edit on 21-12-2011 by tinfoilman because: (no reason given)

you mean like a group that don't want it to be equal? TBH i think in a pure communist Marx/Lenin style country they would been seen as a KKK or BNP
style group. it would be evident they want to upset an equal balance for greed or for trouble and for that reason it would portray them as bad people
for trying to drive a wedge into society and make a gap between people towards a system that is designed to make equality.

In a word no, There has never been a true Communist or even Socialist state, most so called, Cold war Communist states, were State Capitalists
Dictatorships, disguised as Communism. Marxism gives the people an equal share, in say for instance a factory, where all it's workers, shop floor, or
management, get treated the same and share the profits and desicions affecting their work. However, human greed for power and wealth always rears
it's ugly head. This never happened in the Soviet Union, North Korea, China etc as the the state profitted off the backs of the workers, just like
the regimes that went before them, and repressed, tortured, all the intelectuals who would argue against the regime. Cuba come close as everyone in
Cuba earns the same wage, but that stil isn't true Comunism. The only way it would work is if money was abolished, ie. like in Star Trek, which is
basically Utopian Socialist Federation that works for the betterment of Mankind :-)

No political or economic ideology enacted has ever actually been what they profess to be in theory.

Democracy has never truly been democracy.
Capitalism has never truly been capitalism.
Communism has never been communism.

Because no pure ideology can ever remain pure, nor should it. Why? Because if it did, we would exist under dogmatic/fundamentalist order; and look
at the order of nations and ideologies we label as fundamentalist.

Systems of governance must be able to evolve with society, culture and technology otherwise they fail...that is why we are failing economically and
politically...the evolution of our civilization is being hampered.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.